Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 127
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 281(6): 2931-2939, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38273045

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of piston diameter in patients undergoing primary stapes surgery on audiometric results and postoperative complications. METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort study was performed. Adult patients who underwent primary stapes surgery between January 2013 and April 2022 and received a 0.4-mm-diameter piston or a 0.6-mm-diameter piston were included. The primary and secondary outcomes were pre- and postoperative pure-tone audiometry, pre- and postoperative speech audiometry, postoperative complications, intraoperative anatomical difficulties, and the need for revision stapes surgery. The pure-tone audiometry included air conduction, bone conduction, and air-bone gap averaged over 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz. RESULTS: In total, 280 otosclerosis patients who underwent 321 primary stapes surgeries were included. The audiometric outcomes were significantly better in the 0.6 mm group compared to the 0.4 mm group in terms of gain in air conduction (median = 24 and 20 dB, respectively), postoperative air-bone gap (median = 7.5 and 9.4 dB, respectively), gain in air-bone gap (median = 20.0 and 18.1 dB, respectively), air-bone gap closure to 10 dB or less (75% and 59%, respectively) and 100% speech reception (median = 75 and 80 dB, respectively). We found no statistically significant difference in postoperative dizziness, postoperative complications and the need for revision stapes surgery between the 0.4 and 0.6 mm group. The incidence of anatomical difficulties was higher in the 0.4 mm group. CONCLUSION: The use of a 0.6-mm-diameter piston during stapes surgery seems to provide better audiometric results compared to a 0.4-mm-diameter piston, and should be the preferred piston size in otosclerosis surgery. We found no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications between the 0.4- and 0.6-mm-diameter piston. Based on the results, we recommend always using a 0.6-mm-diameter piston during primary stapes surgery unless anatomical difficulties do not allow it.


Subject(s)
Audiometry, Pure-Tone , Bone Conduction , Otosclerosis , Postoperative Complications , Stapes Surgery , Humans , Stapes Surgery/methods , Retrospective Studies , Male , Otosclerosis/surgery , Female , Middle Aged , Adult , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome , Ossicular Prosthesis , Aged , Prosthesis Design , Reoperation , Audiometry, Speech
2.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 281(5): 2313-2325, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38180606

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the hypothesis that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with equal quality of life, hearing benefits and complications rates, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled, equivalence trial in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. The effect on general quality of life, patient satisfaction, (subjective) hearing improvement, postoperative complications and causes of crossover and/or readmission were assessed using questionnaires, auditory evaluations and patients' charts over a follow-up period of 1 year. RESULTS: Overall quality of life measured by the HUI3 was equal between the day-case (n = 14) and inpatient group (n = 14). The overall patients' satisfaction showed a slight favor towards an inpatient approach. There was no significant difference in the subjective and objective hearing improvement between both treatment groups. During the 1-year follow-up period no major complications occurred. Minor complications occurred intraoperatively in three day-case patients resulting in three out of nine admissions of day-case patients. Other causes of admission of day-case patients were nausea and vomiting (n = 1), drowsiness (n = 1), late scheduled surgery (n = 2), social reasons (n = 1), or due to an unclear reason (n = 1). No patients required readmission. CONCLUSION: We found equal outcomes of QoL, patient satisfaction, objective, and subjective hearing outcomes between day-case and inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation. Nine out of 14 day-case patients were admitted for at least one night postoperatively (crossover). No major complications occurred in both groups. A day-case approach seems feasible when using specific patient selection, surgical planning and the preoperative provision of patient information into account. Besides this, the familiarity with a day-case approach of both patient and the surgical team can increase the feasibility of day-case surgery.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural , Speech Perception , Adult , Humans , Cochlear Implantation/adverse effects , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Patient Satisfaction , Quality of Life , Inpatients , Cochlear Implants/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Hearing , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/surgery , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery
3.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38528216

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the assumption that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with lower costs, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation, while maintaining equal quality of life (QoL) and hearing outcomes, for the Dutch healthcare setting. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group (i.e., one night admission). We performed an intention-to-treat evaluation of the difference of the total health care-related costs, hospital and out of hospital costs, between day-case and inpatient cochlear implantation, from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of one year. Audiometric outcomes, assessed using CVC scores, and QoL, assessed using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires, were taken into account. RESULTS: There were two drop-outs. The total health care-related costs were €41,828 in the inpatient group (n = 14) and €42,710 in the day-case group (n = 14). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 days (mean costs of €1,069) in the inpatient group and 0.7 days (mean costs of €701) for the day-case group. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out of hospital costs. The QoL at 2 months and 1 year postoperative, measured by the EQ-5D index value and HUI3 showed no statistically significant difference. The EQ-5D VAS score measured at 1 year postoperatively was statistically significantly higher in the inpatient group (84/100) than in the day-case group (65/100). There were no differences in postoperative complications, objective hearing outcomes, and number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits. CONCLUSION: A day-case approach to cochlear implant surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related costs compared to an inpatient approach and does not affect the surgical outcome (complications and objective hearing measurements), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits).

4.
BMC Med ; 21(1): 490, 2023 12 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38066629

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Olfactory disorders are common in COVID-19. While many patients recover within weeks, a notable number of patients suffer from prolonged olfactory disorders. Much research has focused on the acute phase of olfactory disorders in COVID-19; however, there is still inconsistency regarding the prognosis. We aim to assess both objective and subjective olfactory function in patients with persisting olfactory disorders following COVID-19, 1 year after diagnosis. METHODS: We objectively measured olfactory function in 77 patients who initially had COVID-19-induced smell disorders, 1 year after confirmed diagnosis. These patients previously underwent two objective measurements at approximately 3 and 6 months after COVID-19, in the context of the COCOS trial (COrticosteroids for COvid-19-induced loss of Smell). The main outcome measurement was TDI score (threshold-discrimination-identification) on Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST). Secondary outcomes included objective gustatory function on Taste Strip Test (TST), self-reported olfactory, gustatory and trigeminal function on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and outcomes on questionnaires about quality of life, and nasal symptoms. RESULTS: The findings of this study show that 1 year following COVID-19, the median TDI score increased to 30.75 (IQR 27.38-33.5), regarded as normosmia. The median TDI score started at 21.25 (IQR 18.25-24.75) at baseline and increased to 27.5 (IQR 23.63-30.0) at 6 months following COVID-19. The increase of 9.5 points on the TDI score between baseline and 1 year after COVID-19 marks a clinically relevant improvement. Regarding the self-reported VAS score (1-10) on sense of smell, it increased from 1.2 (IQR 0.4-3.0) at baseline to 3.2 (IQR 1.4-6.0) at 6 months and further improved up to 6.1 (IQR 2.7-7.5) after 1 year. Objective gustatory function increased with 2 points on TST a year after diagnosis. Self-reported olfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal functions also improved over time, as did quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Objective and self-reported olfactory function continued to improve 1 year after COVID-19. The median TDI score of 30.75 (IQR 27.38-33.5) is regarded as normosmia, which is a favorable outcome. However, the rate of improvement on TDI score reduces over time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders , Humans , Quality of Life , Prospective Studies , COVID-19/complications , Olfaction Disorders/diagnosis , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Smell
5.
Int J Mol Sci ; 24(9)2023 Apr 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37175547

ABSTRACT

Sensorineural hearing loss is caused by damage to sensory hair cells and/or spiral ganglion neurons. In non-mammalian species, hair cell regeneration after damage is observed, even in adulthood. Although the neonatal mammalian cochlea carries regenerative potential, the adult cochlea cannot regenerate lost hair cells. The survival of supporting cells with regenerative potential after cochlear trauma in adults is promising for promoting hair cell regeneration through therapeutic approaches. Targeting these cells by manipulating key signaling pathways that control mammalian cochlear development and non-mammalian hair cell regeneration could lead to regeneration of hair cells in the mammalian cochlea. This review discusses the pathways involved in the development of the cochlea and the impact that trauma has on the regenerative capacity of the endogenous progenitor cells. Furthermore, it discusses the effects of manipulating key signaling pathways targeting supporting cells with progenitor potential to promote hair cell regeneration and translates these findings to the human situation. To improve hearing recovery after hearing loss in adults, we propose a combined approach targeting (1) the endogenous progenitor cells by manipulating signaling pathways (Wnt, Notch, Shh, FGF and BMP/TGFß signaling pathways), (2) by manipulating epigenetic control, and (3) by applying neurotrophic treatments to promote reinnervation.


Subject(s)
Cochlea , Hair Cells, Auditory , Infant, Newborn , Adult , Humans , Hair Cells, Auditory/metabolism , Cochlea/metabolism , Signal Transduction , Spiral Ganglion , Neurogenesis
6.
BMC Med ; 20(1): 445, 2022 11 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36384737

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prednisolone has been suggested as a treatment for olfactory disorders after COVID-19, but evidence is scarce. Hence, we aimed to determine the efficacy of a short oral prednisolone treatment on patients with persistent olfactory disorders after COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-centered trial in the Netherlands. Patients were included if they were > 18 years old and if they had persistent (> 4 weeks) olfactory disorders within 12 weeks after a confirmed COVID-19 test. The treatment group received oral prednisolone 40 mg once daily for 10 days and the placebo group received matching placebo. In addition, all patients performed olfactory training. The primary outcome was the objective olfactory function on Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST) 12 weeks after the start of treatment, measured in Threshold-Discrimination-Identification (TDI) score. Secondary outcomes were objective gustatory function assessed by the Taste Strip Test (TST) and subjective self-reported outcomes on questionnaires about olfactory, gustatory and trigeminal function, quality of life, and nasal symptoms. The CONSORT 2010 guideline was performed. RESULTS: Between November 2021 and February 2022, we included 115 eligible patients, randomly assigned to the treatment (n = 58) or placebo group (n = 57). No difference in olfactory function between groups was obtained after 12 weeks. Median TDI score on SST was 26.8 (IQR 23.6-29.3) in the placebo group and 28.8 (IQR 24.0-30.9) in the prednisolone group, with a median difference of 2.0 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.5). There was similar improvement on olfactory function in both groups after 12 weeks. Furthermore, on secondary outcomes, we obtained no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This trial shows that prednisolone does not improve olfactory function after COVID-19. Therefore, we recommend not prescribing prednisolone for patients with persistent olfactory disorders after COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry with trial ID ISRCTN70794078.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders , Humans , Adolescent , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Olfaction Disorders/chemically induced
7.
Ear Hear ; 43(6): 1783-1799, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35696186

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Clinical measures evaluating hearing performance in cochlear implant (CI) users depend on attention and linguistic skills, which limits the evaluation of auditory perception in some patients. The acoustic change complex (ACC), a cortical auditory evoked potential to a sound change, might yield useful objective measures to assess hearing performance and could provide insight in cortical auditory processing. The aim of this study is to examine the ACC in response to frequency changes as an objective measure for hearing performance in CI users. DESIGN: Thirteen bilaterally deaf and six single-sided deaf subjects were included, all having used a unilateral CI for at least 1 year. Speech perception was tested with a consonant-vowel-consonant test (+10 dB signal-to-noise ratio) and a digits-in-noise test. Frequency discrimination thresholds were measured at two reference frequencies, using a 3-interval, 2-alternative forced-choice, adaptive staircase procedure. The two reference frequencies were selected using each participant's frequency allocation table and were centered in the frequency band of an electrode that included 500 or 2000 Hz, corresponding to the apical electrode or the middle electrode, respectively. The ACC was evoked with pure tones of the same two reference frequencies with varying frequency increases: within the frequency band of the middle or the apical electrode (+0.25 electrode step), and steps to the center frequency of the first (+1), second (+2), and third (+3) adjacent electrodes. RESULTS: Reproducible ACCs were recorded in 17 out of 19 subjects. Most successful recordings were obtained with the largest frequency change (+3 electrode step). Larger frequency changes resulted in shorter N1 latencies and larger N1-P2 amplitudes. In both unilaterally and bilaterally deaf subjects, the N1 latency and N1-P2 amplitude of the CI ears correlated to speech perception as well as frequency discrimination, that is, short latencies and large amplitudes were indicative of better speech perception and better frequency discrimination. No significant differences in ACC latencies or amplitudes were found between the CI ears of the unilaterally and bilaterally deaf subjects, but the CI ears of the unilaterally deaf subjects showed substantially longer latencies and smaller amplitudes than their contralateral normal-hearing ears. CONCLUSIONS: The ACC latency and amplitude evoked by tone frequency changes correlate well to frequency discrimination and speech perception capabilities of CI users. For patients unable to reliably perform behavioral tasks, the ACC could be of added value in assessing hearing performance.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Speech Perception , Humans , Hearing , Speech Perception/physiology , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/physiology , Acoustics , Acoustic Stimulation
8.
Sleep Breath ; 25(3): 1267-1275, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33098537

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of the NoSAS (neck, obesity, snoring, age, sex) score, the STOP-Bang (snoring, tiredness, observed apneas, blood pressure, body mass index, age, neck circumference, gender) questionnaire, and the Epworth sleepiness score (ESS) as a screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity based on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the oxygen desaturation index (ODI). METHODS: Data from 235 patients who were monitored by ambulant polysomnography (PSG) were retrospectively analyzed. OSA severity was classified based on the AHI; similar classification categories were made based on the ODI. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC), while predictive parameters were calculated by four-grid contingency tables. RESULTS: The NoSAS score and the STOP-Bang questionnaire were both equally adequate screening tools for the AHI and the ODI with AUC ranging from 0.695 to 0.767 and 0.684 to 0.767, respectively. Both questionnaires perform better when used as a continuous variable. The ESS did not show adequate discrimination for screening for OSA (AUC ranging from 0.450 to 0.525). Male gender, age, and BMI proved to be the strongest individual predictors in this cohort. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the predictive performance of three different screening instruments with respect to both the AHI and the ODI. This is important, due to increasing evidence that the ODI may have a higher reproducibility in the clinical setting. The NoSAS score and the STOP-Bang questionnaire proved to be equally adequate to predict OSA severity based on both the AHI and the ODI.


Subject(s)
Mass Screening/instrumentation , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/diagnosis , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acuity , Polysomnography , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies
9.
PLoS Genet ; 14(4): e1007321, 2018 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29621230

ABSTRACT

Hyperostosis Cranialis Interna (HCI) is a rare bone disorder characterized by progressive intracranial bone overgrowth at the skull. Here we identified by whole-exome sequencing a dominant mutation (L441R) in SLC39A14 (ZIP14). We show that L441R ZIP14 is no longer trafficked towards the plasma membrane and excessively accumulates intracellular zinc, resulting in hyper-activation of cAMP-CREB and NFAT signaling. Conditional knock-in mice overexpressing L438R Zip14 in osteoblasts have a severe skeletal phenotype marked by a drastic increase in cortical thickness due to an enhanced endosteal bone formation, resembling the underlying pathology in HCI patients. Remarkably, L438R Zip14 also generates an osteoporotic trabecular bone phenotype. The effects of osteoblastic overexpression of L438R Zip14 therefore mimic the disparate actions of estrogen on cortical and trabecular bone through osteoblasts. Collectively, we reveal ZIP14 as a novel regulator of bone homeostasis, and that manipulating ZIP14 might be a therapeutic strategy for bone diseases.


Subject(s)
Cation Transport Proteins/genetics , Homeostasis/genetics , Hyperostosis/genetics , Mutation , Osteosclerosis/genetics , Skull Base/abnormalities , Animals , Cell Line , Cells, Cultured , Disease Models, Animal , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Hyperostosis/metabolism , Mice, Inbred C57BL , Mice, Knockout , Osteoblasts/cytology , Osteoblasts/metabolism , Osteosclerosis/metabolism , Signal Transduction/genetics , Skull Base/metabolism , Zinc/metabolism
10.
Int J Audiol ; 60(5): 374-384, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33074733

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Despite the positive effect of a cochlear implant (CI) on tinnitus in many patients, tinnitus remains a problem for a significant proportion of CI users. We investigated the acceptability and effect of sound therapy (a combination of natural background sounds and one concise tinnitus counselling session) on tinnitus and speech perception in CI users who still experienced tinnitus during CI use. DESIGN AND STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty-two CI users (32-78 years) participated in phase 1: a test at the clinic to evaluate six background sounds provided by the sound processor. Eighteen out of the 32 CI users participated in phase 2: an optional take-home evaluation of 2 weeks without sound therapy, followed by 5 weeks with sound therapy, ending with an evaluation visit. RESULTS: Thirty subjects (93.8%) found at least one background sound acceptable. In phase 2, a small improvement with sound therapy was found for tinnitus loudness, annoyance, and intrusiveness. 50% of the subjects subjectively reported benefit of sound therapy. Especially the sense of control on their tinnitus was highly appreciated. No detrimental effect on speech perception was observed. CONCLUSION: The background sounds were acceptable and provided tinnitus relief in some CI users with tinnitus during CI use.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Speech Perception , Tinnitus , Humans , Sound , Tinnitus/diagnosis , Tinnitus/therapy
11.
Paediatr Anaesth ; 30(9): 1033-1040, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32506586

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cochlear implantation in children with sensorineural hearing loss is preferably performed at youngest age because early auditory input is essential to prevent neural plasticity decline. In contrast, the rate of anesthetic adverse events is increased during infancy. Therefore, to provide recommendations regarding an optimal pediatric implantation age, these possible anesthetic risks in infants need to be taken into account. AIMS: This study aimed at assessing the relation between the age at cochlear implant surgery and anesthetic and surgical adverse events. Secondary aims were to evaluate anesthetic and surgical adverse events in relation to (a) the number of preoperative anesthesia-related procedures for cochlear implant candidacy assessment and (b) the anesthetic maintenance agent (total intravenous anesthesia versus inhalation anesthesia) during implantation. METHODS: We executed a retrospective cohort study to evaluate cochlear implantation performed in infants and toddlers between January 2008 and July 2015 in a tertiary pediatric center. We compared anesthetic and surgical adverse events between age-at-implantation (0-12 and 12-24 months of age) groups. Furthermore, we assessed whether anesthetic adverse events occurred during preoperative anesthesia-related procedures for cochlear implant candidacy assessment. RESULTS: Forty-six cochlear implantations were performed in 43 patients requiring 42 preoperative anesthesia-related procedures. Nineteen cochlear implantations (41.3%) were performed during infancy. During implantation, the maintenance agent was either sevoflurane (n = 22) or propofol (n = 24). None of the patients encountered major anesthetic adverse events, whereas minor adverse events occurred during 34 cochlear implantations. Those attributed to surgery occurred following six implantations. Neither the age at implantation nor the anesthetic maintenance agent was significantly related to the occurrence of both types of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events occur independent of the age at implantation, the number of anesthetic preoperative procedures, and the type of anesthetic maintenance agent in patients who received a cochlear implant before 24 months of age.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural , Anesthesia/adverse effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Retrospective Studies
12.
Clin Otolaryngol ; 45(2): 159-166, 2020 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31581355

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To provide insight into healthcare utilisation of rhinosinusitis, compare data with clinical practice guideline recommendations and assess practice variation. DESIGN: Anonymised data from claims reimbursement registries of healthcare insurers were analysed, from 1 January 2016 until 31 December 2016. SETTING: Secondary and tertiary care in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥18 years with diagnostic code "sinusitis." MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare utilisation (prevalence, co-morbidity, diagnostic testing, surgery), costs, comparison with guideline recommendation, practice variation. RESULTS: We identified 56 825 patients, prevalence was 0.4%. Costs were € 45 979 554-that is 0.2% of total hospital-related care costs (€21 831.3 × 106 ). Most patients were <75 years, with a slight female preponderance. 29% had comorbidities (usually COPD/asthma). 9% underwent skin prick testing, 61% nasal endoscopy, 2% X-ray and 51% CT. Surgery rate was 16%, mostly in daycare. Nearly, all surgical procedures were performed endonasally and concerned the maxillary and/or ethmoid sinus. Seven recommendations (25%) could be (partially) compared to the distribution of claims data. Except for endoscopy, healthcare utilisation patterns were in line with guideline recommendations. We compared results for three geographical regions and found generally corresponding rates of diagnostic testing and surgery. CONCLUSION: Prevalence was lower than reported previously. Within the boundaries of guideline recommendations, we encountered acceptable variation in healthcare utilisation in Dutch hospitals. Health reimbursement claims data can provide insight into healthcare utilisation, but they do not allow evaluation of the quality and outcomes of care, and therefore, results should be interpreted with caution.


Subject(s)
Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Reimbursement Mechanisms/statistics & numerical data , Rhinitis/therapy , Sinusitis/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Rhinitis/epidemiology , Sinusitis/epidemiology
13.
Neuromodulation ; 22(4): 416-424, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30102446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neuromodulation is a promising treatment modality for tinnitus, especially in chronic and severe cases. The auditory thalamus plays a key role in the pathophysiology of tinnitus, as it integrates and processes auditory and limbic information. OBJECTIVE: The effect of high frequency stimulation and low frequency stimulation of the medial geniculate bodies on tinnitus in a noise-induced tinnitus rat model is assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Presence of tinnitus was verified using the gap-induced prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle response paradigm. Hearing thresholds were determined before and after noise trauma with auditory brainstem responses. Anxiety-related side-effects were evaluated in the elevated zero maze and open field. RESULTS: Results show tinnitus development after noise exposure and preserved hearing thresholds of the ear that was protected from noise trauma. We found that high frequency stimulation of the medial geniculate bodies suppressed tinnitus. This effect maintained directly after stimulation when the stimulator was turned off. Low frequency stimulation did not have any effects on the gap:no-gap ratio of the acoustic startle response. CONCLUSION: High frequency stimulation of the MGB has a direct and residual suppressing effect on tinnitus in this animal model. Low frequency stimulation of the MGB did not inhibit tinnitus.


Subject(s)
Acoustic Stimulation/adverse effects , Deep Brain Stimulation/methods , Disease Models, Animal , Geniculate Bodies/physiopathology , Tinnitus/prevention & control , Tinnitus/physiopathology , Animals , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/physiology , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem/physiology , Male , Rats , Rats, Sprague-Dawley
15.
Int J Audiol ; 57(6): 426-439, 2018 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29188740

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies show that intracochlear electrical stimulation independent of environmental sounds appears to suppress tinnitus, even long-term. In order to assess the viability of this potential treatment option it is essential to study the effects of this tinnitus specific electrical stimulation on speech perception. DESIGN: A randomised, prospective crossover design. STUDY SAMPLE: Ten patients with unilateral or asymmetric hearing loss and severe tinnitus complaints. RESULTS: The audiological effects of standard clinical CI, formal auditory training and tinnitus specific electrical stimulation were investigated. Results show that standard clinical CI in unilateral or asymmetric hearing loss is shown to be beneficial for speech perception in quiet, speech perception in noise and subjective hearing ability. Formal auditory training does not appear to improve speech perception performance. However, CI-related discomfort reduces significantly more rapidly during CI rehabilitation in subjects receiving formal auditory training. Furthermore, tinnitus specific electrical stimulation has neither positive nor negative effects on speech perception. CONCLUSIONS: In combination with the findings from previous studies on tinnitus suppression using intracochlear electrical stimulation independent of environmental sounds, the results of this study contribute to the viability of cochlear implantation based on tinnitus complaints.


Subject(s)
Correction of Hearing Impairment/methods , Electric Stimulation Therapy/methods , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/rehabilitation , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/rehabilitation , Tinnitus/rehabilitation , Adult , Aged , Cochlea/physiopathology , Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/complications , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/psychology , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/complications , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Noise , Prospective Studies , Speech Perception/physiology , Tinnitus/etiology , Tinnitus/psychology , Treatment Outcome
16.
Audiol Neurootol ; 20(6): 383-93, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26461124

ABSTRACT

The goal of this study was to investigate contralateral hearing aid (HA) use after unilateral cochlear implantation and to identify factors of influence on the occurrence of a unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipient becoming a bimodal user. A retrospective cross-sectional chart review was carried out among 77 adult unilateral CI recipients 1 year after implantation. A bimodal HA retention rate of 64% was observed. Associations with demographics, hearing history, residual hearing and speech recognition ability were investigated. Better pure-tone thresholds and unaided speech scores in the non-implanted ear, as well as a smaller difference in speech recognition scores between both ears, were significantly associated with HA retention. A combined model of HA retention was proposed, and cut-off points were determined to identify those CI recipients who were most likely to become bimodal users. These results can provide input to clinical guidelines concerning bimodal CI candidacy.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/rehabilitation , Hearing Aids/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss, Bilateral/rehabilitation , Adult , Aged , Audiometry, Pure-Tone , Combined Modality Therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Retrospective Studies , Speech Perception
17.
Audiol Neurootol ; 20(5): 294-313, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26227468

ABSTRACT

Cochlear implantation is a viable treatment option for tinnitus, but the underlying mechanism is yet unclear. Is the tinnitus suppression due to the reversal of the assumed maladaptive neuroplasticity or is it the shift in attention from the tinnitus to environmental sounds and therefore a reduced awareness that reduces tinnitus perception? In this prospective trial, 10 patients with single-sided deafness were fitted with a cochlear implant to investigate the effect of looped intracochlear electrical stimulation (i.e. stimulation that does not encode environmental sounds) on tinnitus, in an effort to find optimal stimulation parameters. Variables under investigation were: amplitude (perceived stimulus loudness), anatomical location inside the cochlea (electrode/electrodes), amplitude modulation, polarity (cathodic/anodic first biphasic stimulation) and stimulation rate. The results suggest that tinnitus can be reduced with looped electrical stimulation, in some cases even with inaudible stimuli. The optimal stimuli for tinnitus suppression appear to be subject specific. However, medium-to-loud stimuli suppress tinnitus significantly better than soft stimuli, which partly can be explained by the masking effect. Although the long-term effects on tinnitus would still have to be investigated and will be described in part II, intracochlear electrical stimulation seems a potential treatment option for tinnitus in this population.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/complications , Tinnitus/therapy , Adult , Aged , Cochlear Implants , Electric Stimulation Therapy , Female , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Tinnitus/etiology , Tinnitus/physiopathology , Treatment Outcome
18.
Ear Hear ; 36(1): 125-35, 2015 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25090456

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Research on tinnitus suppression by intracochlear electrical stimulation has gained interest over the past few decades and it has become easier to apply since the introduction of cochlear implants (CI). This study attempted to gain more insight into optimal stimulation characteristics for tinnitus suppression. DESIGN: Eleven subjects with unilateral CI and tinnitus were recruited from our CI clinic. Electrical stimulation, independent of acoustic sounds, was generated using their CI. The current prospective (single blinded) experimental study systematically assessed two stimulation parameters, namely current level and the anatomical stimulation site inside the cochlea and their short-term effect on tinnitus. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of the tested conditions were successful in which case tinnitus loudness was reduced by at least 30%. At least one successful condition was achieved for nine subjects (82%). Complete suppression was achieved in 6 out of 107 tested conditions (6%). The effect of subthreshold electrical stimulation on tinnitus suppression did not differ significantly from above threshold electrical stimulation. However, a positive relation between mean percentage tinnitus suppression and current level was observed. Pitch-matched electrical stimulation did not appear to suppress tinnitus better than other tested conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the subjects were able to experience tinnitus reduction through intracochlear electrical stimulation independent of acoustic sounds. Tinnitus can be reduced with audible or even inaudible, subthreshold stimuli. Clear trends in optimal stimulation characteristics were not found. Optimal stimulus characteristics for tinnitus reduction therefore appear to be highly subject-specific.


Subject(s)
Cochlea , Cochlear Implants , Electric Stimulation Therapy/methods , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/surgery , Tinnitus/therapy , Aged , Cochlear Implantation , Cohort Studies , Female , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/complications , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Single-Blind Method , Tinnitus/complications
19.
ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec ; 77(4): 227-240, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26367113

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The concept of the vestibular implant is primarily to artificially restore the vestibular function in patients with a bilateral vestibular loss (BVL) by providing the central nervous system with motion information using electrical stimulation of the vestibular nerve. Our group initiated human trials about 10 years ago. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2013, 11 patients with a BVL received a vestibular implant prototype providing electrodes to stimulate the ampullary branches of the vestibular nerve. Eye movements were recorded and analyzed to assess the effects of the electrical stimulation. Perception induced by electrical stimulation was documented. RESULTS: Smooth, controlled eye movements were obtained in all patients showing that electrical stimulation successfully activated the vestibulo-ocular pathway. However, both the electrical dynamic range and the amplitude of the eye movements were variable from patient to patient. The axis of the response was consistent with the stimulated nerve branch in 17 out of the 24 tested electrodes. Furthermore, in at least 1 case, the elicited eye movements showed characteristics similar to those of compensatory eye movements observed during natural activities such as walking. Finally, diverse percepts were reported upon electrical stimulation (i.e., rotatory sensations, sound, tickling or pressure) with intensity increasing as the stimulation current increased. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that electrical stimulation is a safe and effective means to activate the vestibular system, even in a heterogeneous patient population with very different etiologies and disease durations. Successful tuning of this information could turn this vestibular implant prototype into a successful artificial balance organ.

20.
Front Surg ; 11: 1381481, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38650663

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The primary objective was to determine whether obliteration of the epitympanic area and mastoid cavity during canal wall up (CWU) cholesteatoma surgery reduces the rate of recurrent and residual cholesteatoma compared to not obliterating the same area. The secondary objective was to compare postoperative hearing outcomes between both techniques. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary referral center. One-hundred-fourty-three ears were included of patients (≥18y) who underwent a CWU tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma with or without bony obliteration between January 2015 and March 2020 in the University Medical Center Utrecht. The median follow-up was respectively 1.4 (IQR 1.1-2.2) vs. 2.0 years (IQR 1.2-3.1) (p = 0.013). Interventions: All patients underwent CWU tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma. For 73 ears bone dust, Bonalive® or a combination was used for obliteration of the mastoid and epitympanic area, the rest of the ears (n = 70) were not obliterated. In accordance with the Dutch protocol, included patients are planned to undergo an MRI scan with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) one, three and five years after surgery to detect recurrent or residual cholesteatoma. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was recurrent and residual cholesteatoma as evaluated by MRI-DWI and/or micro-otoscopy and confirmed by micro-otoscopy and/or revision surgery. The secondary outcome measure was the postoperative hearing. Results: In this cohort, the group treated with canal wall up tympanomastoidectomy with subsequent bony obliteration (73 ears, 51.0%) had significantly lower recurrent (4.1%) and residual (6.8%) cholesteatoma rates than the group without obliteration (70 ears, 25.7% and 20.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both groups in postoperative bone conduction thresholds (mean difference 2.7 dB, p = 0.221) as well as the mean air-bone gap closure 6 weeks after surgery (2.3 dB in the non-obliteration and 1.5 dB in the obliteration group, p = 0.903). Conclusions: Based on our results, a canal wall up tympanomastoidectomy with bony obliteration is the treatment of choice, since the recurrent and residual disease rate is lower compared to the group without obliteration. The bony obliteration technique does not seem to affect the perceptive or conductive hearing results, as these are similar between both groups.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL